masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Alliance Fleet in ME3
ut In the first Mass Effect, before your final showdown with a corrupted Saren Arterius, Shepard is given the choice of sending the Alliance fleet in to save the Council on the dreadnought Destiny Ascension from the Geth Assault (Paragon), leave the council to its demise (Renegade), or focus all firepower upon Sovereign (Neutral). As my fellow Paragon players have likely chosen to save the Council at the expense of many Alliance marines' lives and ships, thus securing a lofty seat in Citadel Space, this obviously leaves the Alliance military with diminished resources at the end of the battle. To that note, I question what inflections this will impose upon ME3. Will Shepard have less time to assimilate his galactic army? How significantly will this affect the human population's survival? Will the Council be even more neglectful to their plight, despite Captain Anderson's/Ambassador Udina's efforts? In addition, for Renegade and/or Neutral players who decided that a renewed or all-human Council to be more suitable than the previous, what will that do to the final chapter in this epic trilogy? Two years after the battle with Saren and Sovereign, in ME2, we see the results of the Council depending on our previous decisions. From a Paragon perspective, having saved the Council and assigned Captain Anderson as the human representative, I've seen that while Anderson backs Shepard 100% (despite his distance at your allying with Cerberus), he doesn't seem motivated to aid him/her in any way, other than to offer words of comfort and encouragement. The Council is even less forthcoming, simply offering to reinstate Shepard as a Spectre. Aside from these examples, a news broadcast can be heard on either Illium or the Citadel with regards to the aforementioned final fight and honors the sacrifices made by the human fleet. I know not what the other alignment options grant from ME to ME2, but I can imagine they're similar enough. So, back to the point at hand: What are your thoughts as to the impacts these choices (all Renegade, Paragon, and Neutral variations) from the first of the series will have on the Alliance fleet and its fate in the last?--Kentasko 23:35, February 8, 2011 (UTC) Unfortunately, I think the Paragon option will probably have dire negative effects upon the Alliance Fleet's ability to combat the Reapers in their final assault on Earth, since if you save the Council, many Alliance ships are lost fighting off the geth to do so. I hope to all that is holy that Bioware doesn't decide to impose some kind of time limit upon you, with the time allotted varying depending on your past choices. As for the Council's reactions, I really don't think that they'll be able to just casually call the Reapers "myths" anymore when they start raining hellfire down upon the Council's respective peoples. Hopefully, some sarcastic "I told ya so" convo option will come up when talking to the Council at some point. The Captain (radio) 04:41, February 28, 2011 (UTC) They have had two years to rebuilt from that--Ironreaper 13:45, February 28, 2011 (UTC) It took Cerberus two years to build the Normandy SR-2 and the Normandy is only a frigate. How many ships have been built to replace those lost to Sovereign and the geth would depend on the size of the ships needing to be replaced, the capabilities of the Alliance shipyards, and how much the Alliance hurries said yards to hurry up and finish those ships. Not only that, but I'm sure all those ships would be madly expensive and its not a given that the Alliance could just plunk down the cash to fund their construction. Soooooo, I still think the Alliance will be significantly weakened by the time of ME3. The Captain (radio) 20:30, February 28, 2011 (UTC) Ceberus only needed one ship, so thats what they built. The Alliance has the economy of humanity behind it. What do you think the production rate is for military weapons in the US? and they were still technically at war with the geth and were temporarly filling the void of peacekeeping forces that the turians filled, so they had a reason to rapidly rebuild their forces. Its also mentioned in ME that the cost of the Normady's massive drive core could have paid for the drive cores on hundreds of ships, so its no wonder cerberus stopped after that. the Alliance could have built quite a few ships with the same money--Ironreaper 00:52, March 1, 2011 (UTC) Ironreaper has a good point regarding the cost and necessity of building only a single, upgraded Normandy replica, yet I agree with The Captain in that while the Alliance has the backing and funding of humanity's resources and income, it doesn't mean the Alliance could so easily replace the number of dreadnoughts, frigates, etc. that they lost against Sovereign. I do believe, however, that the Alliance, or at least some within its ranks understand the threat of a Reaper invasion Shepard alluded to is imminent. Admiral Hackett, for example, protected Shepard from a potential ambush from Alliance scouts, as revealed in an excerpt found on the Shadow Broker's database in the LotSB DLC. Still, there's not enough evidence in ME2 to illuminate the Alliance's current strength, so we'll just have to see in a few months what happens, if anything.--Kentasko 02:29, March 1, 2011 (UTC) Er, not to be a stick in the mud, but---you do know that the Alliance lost only six ships, right? If Cerberus can build a single upgraded Normandy in two years, I think the Alliance can replace six ships. (And before someone starts acting smart and asks where I got the information, its in ME2. Shepard specifically mentions them in the interview with that smart-mouthed reporter). Rath101 21:37, March 2, 2011 (UTC) I agree with Rath101, the Normandy that Cerberus built was incredibly advanced, even more so than the original - remember all the awe being thrown around with the technology in that one? The next Normandy was by far better, especially if the player upgrades it. Two years is a very long time to build a ship, but to be honest TIM is an obsessive perfectionist, probably making every detail of the ship perfect and then some. The Alliance might not employ such perfectionism in making their new ships - I don't doubt they have the money and resources, but the need to rush them off of the production line is paramount to maintain military might (no matter how measly the Alliance fleet is in comparison to the alien fleets). However, it will be interesting to see what impact the player's paragon decisions have in ME3, being a player who made the choice to save the Council myself, and I pray to God that it is nothing devastating...although the gut feeling I have isn't great...oh well, here's to hoping that good prevails. :)--AngelWing 19:14, March 3, 2011 (UTC) Actually, AngelWIng, two years is an average amount of time to build a ship. Especially a space ship. Back in WWII the United States was able at best produce one destroyer a day. However, a naval or "wet" destroyer are magnitudes less complicated than a space destroyer. Even then it was pushing not only the manufacturing process and the workers. Those ships also had mulitple ship yards and entire factories devoted to the war effort. Even two hundred years in the future, that kind of production would be hard to match. Especially with little direct, obvious, and iminent threat opposing the Alliance. Now with the current technology, I am sure that it can be achieved but it might be on the line of weeks or months. Doctalen 00:19, March 4, 2011 (UTC) Exactly. A few pockets of people in the Alliance who believe Shepard (Hackett, Anderson, others) are not enough to mobilize the entire infastructure of humanity into rapidly replacing the ships lost. That, coupled with the fact that I'm sure those ships are 1.) extremely expensive and 2.) very complicated machines combine to lead me to believe they would take a while to replace. Also, I believe those 6 or so ships mentioned by Shepard in that interview were probably the most major ones, as the amount of fighting seen during the Battle of the Citadel would have resulted in more than 6 ships lost. I'd have to go back and look, but I'm pretty sure I saw more than six ships take what looked to be fatal blows in the cinematics from the battle. The Captain (radio) 09:21, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Not true. The Alliance had many direct threats. First from the batarians and batarian backed pirates. This places the Alliance in a Cold War of sorts and would greatly increase the need for weaponry. The geth became a new enemy that the Alliance needed to build ships to prepare against. Lastly the Council races. This is not today. the US pays millions in defence to keep themselves on top. And now we have a massive amount of very powerful species that at any moment could become powerful enemy. It would be naive to assume the first reaction to this would be one of exuberance rather then one of fear. Not to mention it all started with the turians getting the Alliance in a war. If the Alliance wanted to be respected in this new galaxy, become a Council race and be the first to build and defend new colonies from the many new threats, they need a military. It is not to much of a leap to say that technology (mass effect technology among them) would not have made building ships easier, as well as the raw materials and wealth space exploration and colonies have yielded would have helped make it more feasible and less expensive. If it was so expensive they wouldn’t have been able to get such a large military to begin with. Also the alien races have been building ships for centuries, so if humanity wanted to be up to par they would have had to reach that benchmark quickly and the Alliance would have gotten a hold of their methods from aliens as soon as they could.--Ironreaper 10:12, March 5, 2011 (UTC) The Alliance has been on the galactic scene for a few decades. Thats lots of time to build up the military and spread out the spending necessary to do so. Once again, I don't think it would be easy for the Alliance to just come up with the funds overnight to finance the rebuilding of a fleet. That would be like the US losing major ships of the real life 5th Fleet and then being expected to replace it in 2 years. Not gonna happen. Also, again I stress the funds. Take the US's Nimitz-class nuclear aircraft carriers, probably the most expensive ship made today. They cost billions of dollars and take years to build. Now, imagine trying to build something thats probably many times larger and many times more sophisticated. AND putting it in space. Now, also multiply the funds needed by however many ships they need to replace. Expensive, to say the least. Weapons cost money. It takes time to acquire large amounts of money. It takes time to build the weapons bought with said money. The Captain (radio) 10:57, March 5, 2011 (UTC) *I may have to start a new thread for what I'm about to say, but something Ironreaper said gave me a terrible thought. What if ME3 the Council, or the alien races of Council space, turned against the humans? Imagine, the Council knows that the Reapers are truly a threat - to the humans. In the humanity's apparrently weakened state, they unseat the human councilor, then send their fleets to mop up the rest of the Alliance as the Reapers are invading Earth, and only the bonds Shepard has made with particular individuals in the storyline of ME 1 & 2 "could" prevent them from attacking. I shudder to think of such an awful twist, but now others are coming to me. If anyone wishes to expand on this, please let me know. From what I've been reading on the Cerberus Network, it seems human and turian militaries are now conducting exercises together, emphasising on cooperative combat skills and similar capabilities. Even at Pinnacle Station in ME1 the two were working together (with the exception of one salarian) to further collective combat skills. It was also through this joint union that the Normandy, one of the most advanced ships in the galaxy, was created and utilized. What if the Turians, impressed and respectful of humans after the First Contact War and the defeat of Sovereign, have been aiding the Alliance in ship production? An effort made by both species to work and build together could increase the output of weapons, ships, and tech research (as turians don't seem to care for biotics) by grand numbers. Just putting it out there.--Kentasko 15:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Personaly, I believe it wont have any effect, the Alliance only lost 8 ships,which can be rebuilt in no time considering they now have a seat on the council, and the only reason the normandy took so long to build is because it was realy advanced, but even if they couldnt rebuild, with all seriousness how much could 8 ships effect a all ready realy big fleet.Legionwrex 17:11, March 5, 2011 (UTC) I remember that Normandy 2 took so long to build because they had to do it in secrecy, which means that they for example had to buy a tiny gear per three days in order to not cause unwanted attention of authorities and such. Regarding those lost ships, my opinion is this -> they built replacements and probably even more than just those replacements, because they didn't have to hide it and Aliance has more than just one shipyard for sure. One last thing, you know that all weapons except your starters in ME2 were made using only an omni-tool, right? So I think that they make each circuit,armor plate etc separately and then they craft starship, whole process shouldn't take more than couple of months. That'll be all. --Knoxxie 18:43, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Honestly, I forgot all about omnigel, mostly because its one of the most ludacris, ridiculous cop-outs I've ever heard of. With omnigel in the mix, they probably would be easily rebuilt. The Captain (radio) 05:50, March 14, 2011 (UTC) That was a highly specialized vessel, and it wasn't just copied, but largely redesigned. Its not quite that simple. Plus, Cerberus had a fraction of the resources the Alliance had. Aside from the fact that I think that shortfall in time would be horribly unfair, I firmly believe that, particularly with stepped-up efforts following the attack, that in two years, the Alliance could get their fleet back to full strength. They have over ten dreadnaughts, don't they? --FoxtrotZero 03:34, April 20, 2011 (UTC) I have an even more terrifying thought than the one further up the page; what if the council members have been indoctrinated or are in the process of being indoctrinated? Remember that indoctrination is a subtle and insidious weapon and after i learned about it in ME1 i became suspicious of the council especially after their lack of willingness to help in ME2 and may even explain Anderson's lack of help (although i hope not), it would be in the Reaper's best interest to corrupt the leaders of the races they would be attacking. I just hope that I'm just being paranoid and not what actually ends up happening in ME3. --BattleBen 04:03, April 20, 2011 (UTC) The problem with that is that people don't just become indoctrinated. Anderson and the Council were nowhere near the Reapers until the Battle of the Citadel, after which Soverign was force-fed a can of shrapnel by Joker. You'll remember people didn't get heavily indoctrinated until they spent time around Soverign; Saren was using the thing as his flagship. --FoxtrotZero 14:14, April 20, 2011 (UTC) Remember that its not just Sovereign who could indocrinate people; any and all Reaper artifacts are capable of indoctrinating those near them. Case in point: the Reaper artifact from Arrival. Knight Captain Ski (Com Link) 18:49, April 20, 2011 (UTC) I feel that you shouldn't worry to much about this. The Alliance did lose many men and ships during that battle, but only from the Fifth Fleet. Earth defintely has the first and second fleet, and probably has at least two other fleets (speculating, but who skips numbers in naming fleets?) at the lowest. If the combined firepower of these fleets and any number of ships built in the past two years isnt enough to defend Earth, I don't think the ships lost at the Citadel will have any significant effect on the Battle for Earth. --TheCroishKid 21:40, February 8, 2012 (UTC) I think the fleet should be a bit weaker but since you saved the Destiny Ascension it balances your assets. the Destiny Ascension is the main reason the council still lives in my playthrouths.--Icemoomoo 08:17, February 9, 2012 (UTC) This topic is almost a year old. How did it get dredged up? :P But I second the notion that the loss of the eight Alliance cruisers in the Battle of the Citadel will have a minimal effect (if any) on ME3. At the time of the First Contact War, the Alliance already had over 200 warships and all of those were built in less than six years. If the Alliance continued that pace of ship building up until the Reaper invasion, they could easily have four times as many ships. Even if they didn't expand the fleet much, at the very least they could have built replacements for the eight lost ones in the three-year gap between the Battle of the Citadel and the invasion. -- Commdor (Talk) 08:34, February 9, 2012 (UTC) And that was just the Fifth Fleet. They have to be more fleets then that and God knows how big the other fleets are.--Ironreaper 09:00, February 9, 2012 (UTC) It's been stated that the Alliance has been virtually destroyed by the time ME3 starts - the Reapers swept aside other Alliance colonies before coming for Earth. So, basically, no Alliance forces will be present for the retaking of Earth. Um . . . where? It was stated that something (the Reapers) pushed through their defenses and took a number of ships down, but not all of the human fleets. The Earth is under attack yes but the Arturus fleet is still around, as well as a number of fleets not situated at Earth but around relay nexus points.--Ironreaper 10:38, February 9, 2012 (UTC) This is where that God-Awful resource hunting from Mass Effect 1 will finally pay off. Despite our losses, we recovered thanks to shepards claiming or alliance resources, and our alliances with the asari, salarians and turians are enhanced because of the other collections...(leage of one medals etc.) 13:37, February 9, 2012 (UTC) My bad. Ipad didnt log me in. This was me. BeoW0lfe 13:54, February 9, 2012 (UTC) It was the fifth fleet. That leave 4 others maybe more. Who knows when it comes down to it the writers will come up with something. Its JUST fiction. Great fiction, yes. Stargate SG1 and most shows would do this all the time, the writers and Bioware are no different. But we have been promised a war-story. Wouldn't be much of a war if there is no ships, personal, allies, etc. It would just be a slaughter... AS SHEP CAN NOT BE EVERYWHERE AT ONCE! DeadpoolShep 00:22, February 10, 2012 Just want to point out that nothing has been stated as of yet that the entire Alliance fleet will be "wiped out", and that the only statement regarding human colonies across the galaxy thus far, uttered by the female Alliance Defense Councilor, read as such: "Whole colonies have gone dark. We've lost contact with everything beyond the Sol Relay." All that can be pulled from this as fact is that Earth has fallen out of contact with everything outside our solar system. Lost communications does not mean utter obliteration or harvesting right off the bat. There will be other Alliance vessels, and as many of you have stated before, there's more than just the Fifth Fleet.--Kentasko 08:07, February 13, 2012 (UTC) It probably goes without saying the Alliance will lose territory initially. Their forces are built for rapid response, not holding actions. That said, the casualty totals from battles with the Reapers are going to be ... substantial. PhoenixBlue 19:13, February 14, 2012 (UTC) Okay, Everyone here has brought up valid points. Yes by choosing to sacrificing some ships to save the council or letting the council die and choosing a few other options (such as getting Nirali Bhatia's body back for her husband, supporting the Terra Firma party or not) the Alliance may or may not be slightly understrength. The real point is that it won't matter. The Reapers are are more powerful than any one races' fleets. The key to beating the Reapers is Unity amongst the other races. As Anderson states, it's going to take the combined fleets and resources of multiple species to even stand a chance against the reapers. That being said, I do think that the Alliance will have had ample time to rebuild the ships that it lost as it has been almost four years since the battle of the Citadel (Before anyone jumps on that, ME1 happened in 2183, Me 2 happened in 2185 and the intro to ME 3 states it's been 30 years since First Contact in 2157, which would put the date at 2187 in ME 3). Not saying that it would have been an overnight endeavor or an inexpensive one but depending on your actions and choices, it is stated in ME 2 that humans and turians were training together which could also imply a sharing of military assets and resources. Last thing I'll bring up is this. In ME 3 Demo it is stated by one of the members of the committee that communications from colonies have gone silent. I'm sure that some ships were destroyed while this was happening but it's more likely that the Reapers are specifically targeting FTL comm buoys and satellites to create a communication blackout in Alliance space for the sole purpose of moving their fleet in position before attacking. It's more likely that the Reapers intentionally let most Alliance ships slip by unaware so that they could strike at earth and cripple Humanity's seat of power before revealing themselves. It's hard to dislodge a dug in enemy. As powerful as the Reapers are, they aren't invincible and attacking before having Earth under their control means they would run the risk of an Alliance ship getting away and alerting the entire galaxy. --Iiams571 03:23, February 15, 2012 (UTC) I would just like to mention, that did you forget Geth you reprogrammed? If you did, and Rachni Queen? If you didnt kill. I am sure they would help you out. And what will happen with Migrant Fleet once they reclaim homeworld? 16/02/2012 Menon I Imagine that the attack didnt affect them too much. There has been 2-3 years between mass effect 1 and 3, so in that time a few frigates or dreadnoughts can be massed produced. Considering that the Lazerus Cell were the ones that re-built shep and the Normandy, only a small portion of Cerberus, and according to EDE Cerberus has something like 200-ish personnel, so of course they are going to take almost 2 years to rebuild the Normandy. The alliance probably has massive factories that constantly produce ships, weapons and armor. They are still in conflict with some batarians and geth, so of course they are going to have a lot of ships, also *POSSIBLE SPOILER* at the end of the first Demo Mission, after fleeing earth almost all the ships visable in atmosphere are destroyed and the dreadnought goes down with ease midway through the level, also Hackett could be dead since there is no radio contact with him. --Smish34 01:43, February 16, 2012 (UTC) I didn't read everyone's comments because it would have taken too long but I think I got the idea from what I did read. I like playing paragon because I believe it will pay off in the end, here are some thoughts supporting the paragon route. If you saved the Council you lose 8 cruisers, which are the mid-sized warships of the fleet, they also are probably the most numerous part too. As far as rebuilding them goes it is possible that they did and possible that they didn't, it is unknown what the Alliances production capabilities are but it is assumed that it is substantial because they have only been able to travel FTL for less than forty years and they already have this hugh fleet. Also saving the Council also saves the Destiny Ascension (which is a hugh dreadnought with lots of fire power) and possibly any other Council ships near the Ascension at that time, making up for the loss of life. To Smish34, I don't know where you got that Cerberus has 200 personnel, all EDI said was the Cerberus never had more than a dozen cells running at one time, the size and purpose of these cells are not known. Also Iiams571 brings up good points, having friends is what matters in the end. Rachnii FTW. Epzo 19:24, February 17, 2012 (UTC) We don't even know if there is any Alliance fleet left after the invasion of Earth so it might not matter but I'm hoping Hackett was sensible enough to withdraw when he saw the size of the Reaper fleet approaching and save the fleet for a battle it could win but who knows? I'm sure it will make some difference but wont exclude the best ending.--Kroem 09:41, February 20, 2012 (UTC) I think the reapers simply fly per FTL and bypassed all defenses at Acturus, then cut the communication between Sol and Acturus. the reapers are not stupid and do a frontal assault against a space station designed to defend a relay that protected by 2 fleets, and even if they would succeed , the council would investigate why the alliance HQ is not responding. They would lose the surprise effect on the attack on Earth too along with the possibility that reinforcements could arrive within minutes.--Icemoomoo 12:28, February 20, 2012 (UTC) The Systems Alliance Fleet is regarded as one of the most powerful fleets in the galaxy. For maintaining this reputation, they must have massive resources at their disposal to be used in times of need. Surely after Sovereign's defeat and gaining a seat on the Council, the Alliance would have increased its fleet capacity and numbers. Humanity finally became a part of the decision-making body. Its logical they would have built up their fleets as the Treaty of Farixen would no longer apply to humanity.Two years is sufficient time for humanity who have mastered mass effect technology in an amazingly short time. So even if the Council is saved, the Alliance would have rebuilt itself to a greater capacity. With regard to Mass Effect 3, it is logical to assume that the Reapers have bypassed Arcturus and cut of all communications with the galaxy. They wanted to strike a crippling blow against humanity. Its not clear whether the will of humanity has been dealt a severe blow, its up to Shepard to make things right. In the ME3 demo, during the mission to get the female krogan, when the salarian captain protests against the aggressive actions of Wrex, Shepard will say that this confrontation is an insult to the Alliance. From this , its logical to assume that the Alliance still maintains considerable political pull and maybe a semblance of its military capabilty. So Arcturus may have been spared after all.--Thewarrior2012 21:29, February 20, 2012 (UTC) As seen in the ME3 demo, the Alliance seems to have lost quite a few ships DEFENDING Earth from the first Reaper assault... I don't think it's the losses from the Battle of the Citadel we should be worried about, it's the losses they sustained in the initial attack. To me, it seemed as if Admiral Hackett's entire fleet was destroyed (but that's just an impression). If most of the Alliance's military resources were located in or around Earth, I'd say they'd be neutralized due to Reaper occupation. -- Left by 188.61.41.2 I'm going to chip in here with conformation that Hackett is not killed in the initial attack before anybody asks. He can been seen talking to Shepard in one of the clips on last months Game Trailers TV episode about Mass Effect 3. Phalanx-a-pedian 21:12, February 20, 2012 (UTC)